4.5 Review

Treatment of Eustachian tube dysfunction with balloon dilation: A systematic review

Journal

LARYNGOSCOPE
Volume 128, Issue 1, Pages 237-247

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/lary.26800

Keywords

Eustachian tube dysfunction; balloon dilation of the tuba auditiva; adults; systematic review

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ObjectiveBalloon dilation is a new entity in the therapeutic approach of Eustachian tube dysfunction. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the success of balloon dilation of the tuba auditiva in reducing symptoms in adult patients with Eustachian tube dysfunction. Data SourcesEmbase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library. Review MethodsThe systematic literature search was conducted independently by two authors based on title and abstracts, and resulted in 36 articles. These articles were screened as full text, 15 of them were eligible for critical appraisal. Data were extracted from selected studies and presented in this article. A meta-analysis was conducted for four subgroups. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement was used as a writing guideline for this systematic review. ResultsAll 15 included studies were case series. A total of 1,155 patients were treated with balloon dilation of the tuba auditiva. Outcome parameters were relief of symptoms, otoscopy, Valsalva maneuver or Toynbee test, audiometry, tympanometry, Eustachian tube dysfunction classification, and Eustachian tube score. All articles showed short-term improvement of original symptoms; some showed further improvement over time. Follow-up ranged from just after therapy to 50 months. Relatively mild and self-limiting complications were described in 36 patients. ConclusionAll current studies suggest that balloon dilation of the Eustachian tube can be a helpful treatment in patients with Eustachian tube dysfunction. However, placebo controlled trials are still warranted. Laryngoscope, 128:237-247, 2018

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available